10 May 2023 10:39 AM GMT
The Rajasthan High Court has dismissed an employee's petition seeking consideration for promotion to the post of Additional Office Superintendent in the Home Department. The employee is facing disciplinary inquiry in connection with bribery allegations.While dismissing the petition, Justice Vinit Kumar Mathur observed:“In such cases, no mercy can be shown to such persons who are indulged...
The Rajasthan High Court has dismissed an employee's petition seeking consideration for promotion to the post of Additional Office Superintendent in the Home Department. The employee is facing disciplinary inquiry in connection with bribery allegations.
While dismissing the petition, Justice Vinit Kumar Mathur observed:
“In such cases, no mercy can be shown to such persons who are indulged in grave misconduct and they are required to be dealt with iron hands in order to culminate the ills prevailing in the government departments today.”
The petitioner was initially appointed to the post of Lower Division Clerk (LDC) in the Department Of Home Affairs and thereafter, vide order dated 30.06.2015 was promoted to the post of Upper Division Clerk (UDC). After promotion to the post of UDC, he was promoted to the post of Assistant Administrative Officer against the vacancies of the year 2020-21 vide order dated 20.07.2020.
The order dated 20.07.2020 mentioned that the petitioner’s promotion to the post of Assistant Administrative Officer will be made effective from 01.11.2020. In the meantime, an FIR was registered against him on 06.08.2020. He was arrested and was thereafter released on bail. He was subsequently suspended and a departmental inquiry was also instituted against him.
Thereafter, when the respondent-department initiated the promotion exercise for the post of Assistant Administrative Officer for the vacancies during the year 2022-23, the petitioner’s position was shown as ‘Senior Assistant’ in the seniority list.
Advocate Sushil Solanki, the petitioner’s counsel, contended that since the petitioner was already promoted vide order dated 20.07.2020, therefore, showing the name of the petitioner as ‘Senior Assistant’ in the seniority list prepared for promotion to the post of Assistant Administrative Officer for the vacancies of 2022-23 is arbitrary and illegal.
Solanki further contended that in the seniority list prepared, the designation of the petitioner is shown as ‘Senior Assistant’, whereas he already stood promoted to the post of Assistant Administrative Officer vide order dated 20.07.2020.
The counsel for the respondents contended that a bare perusal of the order dated 20.07.2020 shows that the promotion order was to be made effective w.e.f. 01.11.2020. She further contended that after passing of the order dated 20.07.2020, the petitioner was found involved in a criminal case and thereafter, was sent to judicial custody. He was also placed under suspension and the disciplinary inquiry against him is underway, therefore, presently the petitioner has no cause of action, it was argued.
While rejecting the contention of the petitioner that he already stood promoted and had joined on the post of Assistant Administrative Officer w.e.f. 22-07-2020, Justice Mathur observed that the petitioner could not have been allowed to join on the post of Assistant Administrative Officer w.e.f. 22.07.2020 as the promotion was to be made w.e.f. 01.11.2020.
Justice Mathur further noted that the promotional exercise which has been undertaken by the Department for filling up the vacancies for the year 2022-23 is for consideration of the post of Assistant Administrative Officer and since the petitioner had not joined or promoted to the post of Assistant Administrative Officer so far, his name has rightly been shown as ‘Senior Assistant’ in the seniority list prepared by the Department.
Justice Mathur also said the petitioner is facing disciplinary inquiry for a very serious misconduct and has been placed under suspension, and thus it is a premature stage for the court to take into account what will be the fate of the inquiry and whether after culmination of the inquiry.
“This Court is at pains to note that corruption among Government Servants has become endemic and has been eroding the confidence of the common man in governance. Today, corruption in our country not only poses a grave danger to the concept of constitutional governance, it also threatens the very foundation of Indian democracy and the Rule of Law,” the court asserted.
The court further observed that corrupt officials have a demoralising effect on honest public servants and corruption by public servants has become a "gigantic problem".
"Large-scale corruption retards nation-building activities and everyone has to suffer on that count. It cannot be disputed that where corruption begins all rights end,” the bench added.
While dismissing the writ petition, the court observed any indulgence at this stage would be putting a premium on the misdeeds of the petitioner.
Case Title: Madan Lal vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8952/2022
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Raj) 36
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sushil Solanki
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Anamika Bishnoi, Ms. Vandana Bha
Click Here To Read/Download Order